The Sun. — London, England, 1836-07-22 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. HOUSE OF COMMONS, JULY 21. The SPEAKER took the chair at the usual time. SWANSEA HARBOUR BILL. On the motion of Mr. BROTHERTON the Lords' Amendments to this Bill were agreed to. ' DUDLEY VICARAGE BILL. Mr. HALSE brought up the report of the Committee on this Bill. SEE OF DURHAM. Mr. BROTHERTON presented a petition from the inhabitants of Billington, in the county palatine of Durham, praying that the revenues of the See of Durham might not be alienated, but that they might be applied to the aug mentation of small livings within the Diocese. The Hon. Member said he had another petition to present of a rather unusual character, to which he prayed the particular atten tion of the House. It was the petition of an individual of the name of John Bellamy, of Wells-street, Gray's Inn road, and, the petitioner stated that having witnessed the effect of certain Deistical writings, and having given his attention for years to the study of the Hebrew language, he, with the approbation of learned bishops anddivines, undertook to translate the Scriptures from the Hebrew—the present authorised version not having been translated from the Hebrew, but from other translations. The petitioner stated that he had been constantly occupied for a period of forty eight years in this work—that he has translated the whole of the Bible, from, Genesis and Malachi, and that a consi derable portion of the work had been printed and published. He stated that the'objections of the Deists had no founda tions as regarded the original text—that they were founded on mistranslation and misrepresentation, and the petitioner here cited a great number of passages, and contrasted his translation with the authorised version, but with these he would not trouble the House. The petitioner stated that the original work was in strict accordance with the laws of nature—that no one part of the Scriptures in the original contradicted another—that God was not inconsistent with himself in sanctioning at one time what he prohibited at another, and that in no way did the Scriptures sanction polygamy, adultery, incest, robbery, or crime of any other lescription ; and he vindicated the characters of Noah, Abraham, and Lot, and the other worthies of Scriptdre, and these he conceived were most important truths at the present day. The petitioner went on to state that he did not hope that his translation would be allowed to take place of the authorised version ; but as it had been made directly from the Hebrew text, he hoped that in any version of the Scriptuaes his translation would be taken into consideration. He hoped that Parliament would receive his statements as not unworthy of attention in a national point of view. He ( Mr. Brotherton) had felt it his duty to present this petition. MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS (IRELAND). Sir A. L. HAY presented a petition from Banff regret ing that justice had not been done to Ireland with regard to her Municipal Corporations, and praying the House to introduce, as speedily as possible, a measure based upon the same principles as that which they had passed this ses . OMNIBUSSES. Dr. BOW RING presented a petition from George Shillibeer, stating that in consequence of the defective state of the law regarding vehicles, he had sacrificed upwards of 10,0001., and praying the interference of the House, in order that such laws might be made as would protect the property of individuals, and secure the public. The petition stated that in order to do this it was necessary that the police should have more extensive ' power. He (Dr. Bowring) was of opinion that the more the Legislature in terfered in matters of this description the less would be the public convenience. The SPEAKER said the Hon. Member could not enter into any details on the presentation of the petition. Dr. BOWRING had also a petition to present from the Town Council of Dunbarton, approving of the plan of Scotch Municipal Reform. The Hon. Member gave no tice that to-morrow he should present a petition from Hugh Craig, of Kilmarnock, complaining of the conduct of the Scotch Church, in dismissing him from the office of Elder, for presiding at a public meeting, praying for a separation of Church and State. Mr. HUME gave notice that he should to-morrow pre sent a petition, from an individual complaining of very oppressive conduct pursued towards him by the Scotch Church. DUBLIN POST-OFFICE. Mr. WILKS presented a petition of which he had given notice, from C. D. Devitt, for 17 years employed in the General Post-office, Dublin. The petitioner had in 1829 discovered some frauds which were practised by his superiors in office to the amount of 5,000/., of which he had immediately given notice to his superiors, and Lords Ross and O'Neil, the Post-Masters General for Ireland. A pro secution was directed—one of the parties absconded to America, and the other was convicted and sentenced to seven years' trauportation. Efforts had been made to im pute impropriety to the petitioner ; but he bad obtained a e , rtifirate from the juch4-es who had tried the ease, bearin g testimony to his disinterestedness. Nothwithstanding which he had been in the year 1835 dismissed without notice. his wife was the keeper of a receiving -house in Dublin, from which she also was discharged. She died of a broken heart in the course of a year, and .the petitioner, after seventeen years' faithful and honest service, was turned out on the world with ten children to support. no had now been struggling nearly four years in order to receive jus tice, which had been advocated by all parties, by Lord Oxmantown, the son of Lord Ross, who was one of the Postmasters-General at the time ; by the Hon. and Learned Member for Dublin University ( Mr. Shaw), and by the Hon. and Learned Member for Kilkenny ( par. ties advocated his claim In Aug., 1835, the Treasury took the case into their consideration, and stated, that upon in vestigation they found .that the petitioner had been accom modated with sums of money according to the practice of the Irish Post-office, and that he must either have connived at tie irregularity or was ignorant of his duty ; but that they would allow him what arrears of pay were due to him at time time of his dismissal. That was contrary to the testimony of the superiors in the office of the joint Postmasters-General of Ireland, and of the Judges who tried the case to which al lusion had been made. He had sometimes received advances of money on account of the current quarter, which was-.the universal practice in the office. The judges were of opinion, and successive postmasters were of opinion, that the petitioner was entitled to great credit, and that• he had been made a victim for having come forward and exposed to the country a most nefarious fraud. Under these circumstances, be was surely entitled to a pension, and to the receipt of the balance of 56/. But notwithstanding this minute of the Treasury, he bad never received it ; he had applied to the Treasury, they had referred him to the Post-office, and they had referred him to the Irish Post-office. Under these circumstances, it was impossible that things could rema i n i n th e i r present state. In his opinion,it was not only a matter of individual justice, but ofj ustice to all persons who might be placed in such a state of circumstances. He would, therefore, now move that the petition should be brought up and read, and on Friday next, he should move for the papers necessary to substantiate the statements in the petition, and for the ap pointment of a Select Committee thereon. The SPEAKER thought the petition was irregular as money was asked for by it. There was no rule more clear than that no petition could be received that ap plied for money, without the sanction of the House. It was true, that in the present petition, the word money was carefully kept out of the paper ; but still the statements and substance of the petition was to apply for money. He thought peculiar caution ought to be exer cised on receiving the petition. Great laxity had been ex ercised on the subject ; but he thought tie House ought to revise the rule which till latterly had strictly been adhered to. Mr. WILKS said the prayer of the petition was for a public investigation into circumstances that were necessary for the protection of his character, as the petitioner con tended he had been dismissed without any cause. The SPEAKER said, if the petition was received, it must be upon the understanding that money should be ex cluded.—(Hear, hear.) The petition was then brought up and read. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER con ceived that every subject of the realm who felt that he had been aggrieved by a decision of any part of his Majesty's Government had a just and legitimate claim to approach that House, even though the wrong he had suffered might be of a pecuniary nature ; but he had no right, with a view of redress from pecuniary wrongs, to come to the House for a redress of those wrongs in the shape of a pecuniary grant, though he had a right to complain of the wrongs he had received. As the Hon. Member who had presented the petition had stated, that at a future period he should bring the subject of the petition more fully before the House, he thought it should be received. The complaint of the petition was that the petitioner had been deprived of the superannuation allowance, and unless the House was prepared to act upon the suggestio n of the Chair, it would be establishing the most inconvenient of all precedents, because they would be opening the door to all private applications for money, which, above all things, it behoved the House to watch with great caution, not only for the interest of the public, but of the House. Mr. HUME had thought the petition was open to the objection which had been stated, but he conceived it might be allowed to lie on the table ; and whether it should go to the Committee or not would depend on the case his Hon. Friend might make out. Mr. WILKS moved that the petition be printed, and gave notice that he should, on the 29th of July, bring the matter under the consideration of the House. DUTY ON WHISKEY. Sir RUFANE DONKIN said he had two petitions to present, upon a subject in which the morals and well-being of his constituents were deeply concerned. He trusted the House would bear with him for a moment, while he stated— The SPEAKER—The Hon. Member had better not enter into details. Sir RUFA NE DONKIN would occupy the House but a very few moments — The SPEAKER—What is the subject of it? Sir R. DONKIN—It complains of the inequality of the duties on whiskey, Sir.—(Great laughter.) The Hon. Member stated that the petitioners prayed the House would consider the inequality of the duties on Scotch and English whiskey, and by removing those inequalities put a stop to the evils they complained of, One of the petitions was signed by the Mayor, Burgesses, and Aldermen, and the other was signed by the inhabitants of Berwick-upon- Tweed. FRENCH CLAIMS. Mr. MACKINNON gave notice that he should move for a Morning Sitting on Thursday next, to consider the sub ject of the French claims. FACTORIES BILL. _ _ Mr. WAKLEY presented a petition from the factory labourers of Tewkesbury and Barnsley, praying the House to pass the Ten Hours' Bill. The Hon. Member also presented a petition from Joseph Fielding, schoolmaster of Middleton, praying the House to protect the public in those cases wherein persons were supposed to die from one cause, but in reality from the practice of medical men.—(A laugh.) The petitioner prayed that when a person died under doubtful circumstances, and under the operation of a medical man, the medical practitioner. him self may not conduct the examination. The Bill which he had before the House would remedy this evil, if his Majesty's Ministers would allow it to pass this session. LAND LOOM WEAVERS. Lord D. STE WART presented a petition from 900 land loom weavers of Kilmarnock, complaining of distress, and praying the House to pass some measure of relief. The Hon. Member also presented a petition to the same effect from Pollockshawes, in Renfrewshire. SOUTH LONDON CEMETERY. Mr. HARVEY brought up the Report' of the South Metropolitan Cemetery. Mr. POTTER begged to know if the necessary amend ments bad been made in the Bill? Mr. HARVEY replied in the affirmative. BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE. Mr. BAINES had to complain of a very serious grievance which every Member of the House must have felt. The SPEAKER inquired if the Hon. Member had any specific motion to make ? Mr. BAINES intended to give notice of a motion. The SPEAKER—Then the Hon. Member will please ..-; to state what it is laugh.) Mr. BAINES would have been very glad to state his rea motion • sons, but they were too .well, known. His was, to prevent the necessary interruption =of the business 'al Parliament from forty Members not being present when the Speaker takes the chair, that a quarter of an hour be allowed in order to assemble the suitable number of Mem bers ; and that when it is observed that the proper number of Members are not present, then a quarter of an hour be allowed before the House is counted out. He begged to give that notice for Tuesday next. • Mr. ROBINSON gave notice that on Tuesday the 26th instant, he should present a petition from the underwriters and others interested in the wreck of his Majesty's ships. The dropped Orders of yesterday were read over for the purpose of being fixed for other days. Mr. WAKLEY complained of the non-attendance of the Members of the Government yesterday, there being only two present, and hoped they would condescend to state when they would have a House on Wednesday? The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER thought the rain was much more to blame than the Government for there being no House.—(Hear and laughter.) He was as much disappointed as any one, for he had a notice on the books, and though it was not a Government Bill, he was very anxious to get on with it. He was, therefore, one of those unhappy persons who were suffering from the non attendance of Members. STAMP DUTIES 81LL..., Mr. ROBINSON said the Chancellor of Exchequer bad promised that he would then be able to inform the House, whether it was his intention to proceed with any other part of the Stamp Duties Bill than that part of it which related to Newspapers. It would be very conve nient for the House to know what course it was intended to take with regard to it. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said he did not think that he would be enabled to pass the whole of the Bill during the present Session. There were certain parts of it, however, which he thought it would be his duty to endeavour to carry into a law this session. Mr. WALTER said he had a very important petition to present, and he hoped he would be allowed to do so then. The SPEAKER said it was now 5 o'clock, and the Hon. Member could not nresent a petition so late. Mr. WALTER said fie had given notice of his intenti on to present it on reading the Order of the Day. The SPEAKER said if the Hon. Member were allowed to present his petition now, other members might claim the same liberty, and they would never get into public business. AG RI CULTURAL COMMITTEE. Lord DARLING TON wished to know from the Noble Lord opposite ( Hovvick) whether this Committee in tended to report this Session ? He had heard with no less regret than astonishment, that the Com mittee had come to the conclusion not to make a report. He was sure if this were the case, that the agri cultural community would feel extreme dissatisfaction. He wished also to hear whether, as it ivas not intended to make a report, any motion would be brought forward so as to lead to a general discussion of the subject, so that the public might be informed of the reasons that had prevented the Committee from making a report ? Lord HO WICK, as the question bad been put to him, had no hesitation in saying that it was certainly a matter of no less surprise to him, to hear that the Gentlemen of the Committee were not prepared to adopt a report.—( Hear, hear.) The motion to this effect had been by the Right Hon. Baronet the Member for Cumberland (Sir James Graham), and seconded by the Noble Lord the Member for Buckinghamshire (Lord Chandos). The members of the Government were perfectly prepared to discuss the proposition of a report which had been made by his Hon. Friend the Member for Hampshire (Mr. Le fevre) ; in deference, however, to the _opinions of those Gentlemen immediately connected with the agricultural in terests upon the Committee, they (the Government) ac quiesced in the strong desire that was expressed that there should be no opinion whatever reported—(Cheers)." He would take that opportunity of stating that, previous to this con clusion being adopted, he had ventured to state his sur prise that in a Committee of 25 persons present (18 being. county Members), not one of them took any interest in bringing forward any proposal for discussion with a view to relief. If, therefore, the Noble Lord (Darlington) felt disappointed, for that disappointment the members of the Government on the Committee were not responsible.— (Loud cheers.) Sir J. GRAHAM said that as he had been alluded to personally by the Noble Lord, he felt it due to himself to state how the facts really stood. The Noble Lord had entered into disclosures of the reasons given by individual members of a Select Committee, and of the conduct of in dividual members. Mr. HA WES rose to order. If this discussion were continued, any Member of the House who entertained opinions opposite to those of the Right Hon. Baronet would, he hoped, have an opportunity of stating them. Sir J. GRAHAM claimed a right to be heard in expla nation of what had fallen from the Noble Lord (Howick). It was not possible to conceive a subject of greater im portance to the country than this, at the time the motion for a Committee was made. By whom was that motion made ? By the Noble Lord, the Secretary of State for the Home Department. Did the Government undertake the management of the agency ? When a similar inquiry was instituted during the Government of Earl Grey, a Cabinet Minister presided over it, and it was carried on under the control of the executive Government. What was done on this occasion Did any Member of the Government take the chair ?—and did the Members of the Government on the Committee give a constant attendance during the progress of the inquiry ? The chair was filled by an Honourable Member who supported the Government, but he was not connected with them ; and as to attendance, a note had been taken of every day's attendance, and by that it would appear what the attendance of the Members of the Government had been. The Noble Lord (Howick) said that the Members of the Government had acquiesced in there being no report. It was true that that Noble Lord himself did object to the course that was pur sued ; but he appealed to him, and to the other Members of the Committee, as to what had been the course pur sued by the Noble Lord the Secretary of State for the Home Department (Lord J. Russell). He asked whether any Member of the Committee commented in more severe terms on the proposal that a report should be made than the Noble Lord (Russell.) It was, therefore, with astonish ment that he heard from the Noble Lord (Howick), that the members of the Government had barely acquiesced in there being no report.—(Loud cheers.) He understood the Noble Lord himself (Howick) that nothing would induce him to agree to the report proposed, but that there was a report of another description which he favoured. (The Right Hon. Baronet sat down amid cries of " Move, move.") Sir J. GRAHAM—Sir, I move that the other Orders of the Day be now read.—(Cheers.) The Marquis of CHANDOS said that he had opposed this report, and he had done so believing that if the report had gone before the country as it existed before the Committee, it would have done more harm to the farmer than any one could possibly conceive. If there was any blame in doing so, he would take upon himself the whole of it. Mr. S. LEFEVRE was sure there was every en deavour on the part of the Committee to sift every ques tion of agricultural distress. Ho bad himself taken every pains upon the subject, his only object being that every person connected with agriculture, who had any thing to complain of should have their complaints sifted. With respect to this unfortunate report, all he could say was, that it was framed with an honest conviction that it was supported by the evidence adduced. He might be right or wrong ; but he certainly thought if the Committee had done him the honour to go on with the report, every paragraph in it would have been supported by evidence. No one had a greater interest in the prosperity of the farmer than he had ; but the great mischief, in his opinion, was that the farmers had never been told what their real inte rest was. They had been taught to place great dependence upon the Corn Laws, and such things—(Hear, hear)—and therefore it was that he was anxious to disclose to the farmer that they must not look solely to Parliament for a redress of their grievance, but to their landlords—(Cheers) —who should reduce their rents.—(Continued cheers, and cries of " Hear.") He really thought that any report to be satisfactory to the House or the public should have been unanimously agreed to by the Committee.—(Cheers.) It was his belief that it was not in the power of the Le gislature to do the farmer any great - good, and he hoped ere long they would be convinced of that. Mr. HUME said the Committee was moved, at the earnest and anxious desire of the country gentlemen on the other side of the House.—(Cheers.) And if a Committee was to be appointed on so important a question, the Government were right in acceding to the request. He was glad to hear that it had ended as it had ; it was nothing more than he expected.—(Cheers.) But with respect to the statements of the Noble Marquis, he would tell him that the parts of the evidence he had seen, instead of supporting, destroyed his case altogether.— (Cheers.) The labouring man was now in a better condi tion than he- was before, or had been for many years. The great object of the Noble Lord was to take taxation off the landed interest. Why, what taxation did they bear ?—(Cheers.) None, except for a few horses, and so on.—(Cheers.) The landed interest did not pay one-fourth of the taxes that other members of the community did.— (Cheers.) He differed with the Noble Marquis on the point of allowing the evidence to go forth to the public—he wished it to do so, because he was sure it would make a case against the Noble Lord.—(Cheers.) Mr. E. DENNISON said the real question before the Committee was not whether they should agree to the report of the Chairman, but,whether they should agree to any report at all. The course pursued was before the Chaipt man's report was considered, and the motion made tlrat it should be .taken into consideration, the Right Hon. Ba ronet, , in .order to save the time of the Committee, as he stated, said he would state his opinion on the subject, and on that motion he was seconded by the Noble Lord op posite. Sir C. B. VERE thought it was the bounden duty of the Government or the House to draw a report from this Committee. After agricultural distress had been so uni versally acknowledged—after the Legislature had been called upon by the Government to inquire into the nature and the causes of the distress—it certainly would be considered most strange that the Government had not taken any pains, had not taken any step, to induce the Committee to have laid some report upon the table of the House. What, or to whom, were the agricultural body to look if they were so deserted by the Government and by that House—they will enquire how it happened, and the conclusion they must come to will be a very dishearteninc , one.— (Hear, hear, hear.) The report which had been drawn up could never have been sanctioned by the agricul tural body—it was preposterous. It was now said that the evidence was to be communicated to that body ; but what possible satisfaction could that give them ? As the present Government refused to do justice or their duty by that body, he hoped he would soon see another Government in their places who would do so. Mr. W AKLEY could not allow the statements which had been made with regard to the welfare of the labourers to go forth without enquiring, whether any labourers had been called before the Committeee ; and if so, from what county were they selected ? Several Hon. Members rose, but there was a general cry for— , Lord JOHN RUSSELL, who said he was sorry that • lie had not been present at the commencement of the dis cussion ; for he felt bound to afford such explanation as was in his power, after what had fallen from the Hon. Baronet opposite. The case stood thus—the Noble Lord, the Member for the county of Buckingham, had given notice of his intention of moving for a Committee to enquire into the causes of Agricultural Distress. The Government thought that from the many complaints which had been made of distress from the owners of land, but more particularly from the occupiers, it was fit that a Committee' should be appointed ; at the same time in proposing that Committee, he did not state that there was any permanent measure of relief which could be pointed out by such a Committee, but that oerta;rl burdens, such as county rates and poor rates, they might inquire and point out whether those measures lately passed by the Legislature had been beneficial in their operation. The Committee had prosecuted its inquiries with great dili gence. He had said in Committee it would be unwise to put any fetters on the inquiries of the Committee, and the consequence was, that he believed the Committee went into an inquiry more extended than the Committee of 1833 had done. At the conclusion of their labours, but at • the same time while there were a sufficient number of the Members of the Committee still in attendance, his Hon: Friend the Chairman of the Committee proposed the draft of a report. That draft of the report was communicated to him, along with other Members of the Committee. A meeting of the Committee was summoned to consider it, and at that meeting not less than 25 Members of the Com mittee attended, of whom IS were Members for counties, chiefly representing agricultural districts. He had gone to the Committee, in the expectation that the draft Report was to be considered point by point, and he was then ready to give his opinion upon every sentence of Hear, hear.) To his great astonishment he found the Chairman of the Committee of 1833, his Right Hon. Friend (the Member for Cumberland) proposing to the Com mittee that the whole report should be suppressed, that not a word of it should be taken into consideration, but that a Resolution should be passed, saying that they should report only the evidence. He had thought that that was rather extraordinary, but his surprise was lessened, and his opinion was certainly a good deal changed, when the Noble Lord the Member for Buckinghamshire seconded that proposition.—( Cheers.) He was astonished to find that not only was it proposed to suppress that report, but that by those who had been calling out for months, . not only for months, but for years.--(Hear, hear.) With respect to the distress of the agriculturists, he had no proposal to make—(Cheers)—he had no definite remedy to propose upon Agricultural Distress.—(Renewed cheers.) He had stated to the Committee that it was his wish they should give their opinion with respect to the Poor Laws, and the new Poor Law Bill now in operation ; that they should give their opinion with respect to a remedy regarding tithes ; and that it was his wish likewise, that they should come to some opi nion or other with respect to the question of the currency, which had been much inquired into by that Committee. He had declared himself ready to enter into those questions, and that he would endeavour to make his opinions prevail ; but if his opinions did not prevail, he was ready to say the Committee agreed to a re port stating the opinions of the majority of that Committee. Under these circumstances, he did say the Government were not responsible that the Committee had not come to any other result. His Noble Friend had stated that the Committee not coming to any other report, nega tived the statements that had been made with re gard to agricultural distress, and the remedies that had been proposed.—(Hear.) He concurred in that opinion.--.(Hear, hear.) The House was of course well aware that the subject of the currency had often been made matter of complaint amongst the farmers, and that it had been frequently put forward as the great means of remedying their distress ; it was therefore much to be re gretted that the Committee should have separated without coming to a decided opinion upon a question so much oc-' copying the attention of the agricultural classes. He thought that when so fair an opportunity offered, there ought to be an expression of opinion on the partof the Com mittee against any change in the measure respecting the cur rency, which the Right Hon. Baronet the Member for Tam worth several years ago introduced. His own opinions on that subject were, of course, well known ; it was needless for him to repeat them ; but he hoped he might be allowed to say, that for the non-adoption of a Report on that sub ject, his Majesty's Government• were not responsible.— ( Hear.) Those members of the Administration who happened to be on the Committee came down prepared, in consider ing the Report generally, for a three or four days' debate on the several topics which it ought to have embraced. But as the House had now been made aware, there was no Re port ; distress existed in the opinion of several members ; it was said to have existed for many years past, especially amongst the occupiers, whose circumstances he, in common with others, much lamented ; still those members of the Committee who sat at the opposite side of the House, said there was, notwithstanding the alleged distress extensively prevailing and long-continued, to be no change in the currency—no removal of the malt-tax—no measure of specific relief.—(Hear, hear.) He was not particularly fond of calling himself the advocate of the agriculturists-*---he was not particularly fond of calling meetings of the farmers and representing to them that either the Government or the Parliament could do much for their relief ; neither was he fond of telling them that one of the great political par ties into which the House happened to be divided was com posed of none but their enemies, and the other of none but their friends—( Hear, hear)—that was what he had not done ; what he did was of this description—he co-operated with the former Government in all measures for the relief of the agricultural interest—he co-operated with that Go vernment in passing a Biil for preventing abuses in the ad ministration of the Poor Laws, which was a vast improve ment to rents, a great security to land, and calculated to effect a decided amelioration in the state of the labouring popula- tion of England, especially as regarded the independence of their character. Another measure for the relief of the agri cultural interest which he was instrumental in passing was that which put an end to the almost intolerable burthen of the payment of tithes in kind. He had assisted his Right lion. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer with respect to the grievance of county-rates. He thought he was warranted, then, in saying that he had on every occasion supported mea sures calculated to promote the interests of the agriculturist, and the advantage of the country at large, agricultural, mann facturing,and commercial ; at the same time that he had never stood forward as the especial advocate of any particular class. He did not think that, as the member of a Government, or as a Member of Parliament, he should be justified in pursuing such a course of conduct, for his doing so would render him undeserving of that character of impartiality which ought to I distinguish men in both situations.—(Hear, hear.) He had never raised any cry on either side of any of those questions. He had proposed no imputations on the character of Par liament or of parties ; he had supported the Right Hon. Baronet opposite, as regarded the malt tax and the cur rency, as well as in any other wise and enlightened mea sure which he introduced : when the interests of the coun try were at stake he did not regard party advantages. ( Hear, hear..) He trusted that he had now fairly stated the position in which the Committee were placed, and that he had succeeded in showing that the Committee consi dered the farmers were indulging a perfect delusion when they supposed that Parliament could adopt any direct measures of relief to the alleged agricultural distress ; they in fact suggested no measures by which distress could be relieved, or discontent removed.—(Hear, hear.) Mr. 0. GORE hoped that the fact of the Committee not making a report would not be considered as a proof that great distress did not exist. He thought that the Committee were not doing their duty in, separating without making a report.—(Loud cheers.) The farmers throughout the country could not spare time to wade through the whole of the evidence, and therefore the Committee ought at best to have drawn up a summary.—(Hear, hear.) Sir R. PEEL, as a Member oaLtighSiommittee, thought it necessary to say a few words. When the. Conniiiitteel was appointed, he gave a reluctant went. He gait 'an -‘s-- sent to it upon these express terms—he knew that distress prevailed in many parts of the country, and he knew what were the feelings of those who witnessed that dis tress, and who were suffering from it. He therefore acceded to this inquiry upon this single ground, that it might in some degree reconcile the parties to endure the distress that could not be remedied. He could not con ceal from himself the fact, that the only public tax bearing directly upon the agricultural interest to any important amount was the Malt Tax. That was a subject of so much importance, connected as it was with the whole financial concerns of the country, that he felt satisfied the House would reserve to itself a deliberate judgment upon it, and would not take the report of a Committee with respect to its reduction.—(Hear, hear, and loud cheers.) He was not disappointed that the Committee had not agreed upon a report. He was sure that his Honourable Friends would naturally feel surprised at the absence of a report ; but he was equglly sure that their surprise and disappointment were comparatively small to that which they would have felt if the Committee had presented a report. Then, with re spect to the supposed relief from a change in the currency, it was his opinion that as they had now lived for fifteen "or sixteen years under a settled and determined currency, it would be highly injurious to the public interest to change it. Nothing could advance the interest of the workman more than to receive the reward of his labour in a fixed currency. As to himself', he was more bound up with the agricultural than with any other interest, and should be the last man to injure it. His attachment to the agricultural interest was for manifold reasons of the most rooted kind. Reasons of the strongest nature, both socially and politically, rendered it his duty to maintain and in crease the prosperity of that interest, which did not apply to interests of a different nature. On the occasion of .the Committee being moved, he had delivered his opi nion upon the probability of the success of that Committee. By the interference, he had then said, of the Le g islature, benefit to the agriculturist would not arise. He had said that it was by increased attention to rearing the articles produced, and by attention to cultivation in general, rather than by legislative interference, that any good could be ef fected, and that to hold out expectations of any material good from the labours of the Committee, was to encourage expectations of a most fallacious kind.—(Hear, hear.) He now entertained the same opinion, and he said to the far mers of England, " Turn your attention to Scotland, and thete you will find that the agriculturist himself can more beneficially and more adequately assist himself, than he can be assisted by the interference of Parliament." He told them what he believed to be the honest truth, that liiment could not apply itself to individual cases, and that if it interfered, it could not do so effectually : so it was better it should not interfere at all. A great revolution had taken place in the country, which had rendered the fruits of la bour convertible where previously they had been of no avail. That revolution had been brought about by the powerful agency of steam. By means of steam naviga tion the produce of what had heretofore been considered exhausted soil had been brought into competition with others produced in distant markets. The produce of stiff and clay land had been brought into competition with the produce of more favourable soils. But so long as that competition continued, and until the course of time gave it an unavoidable check, it was impossible that partial distress should not exist without there was a considerable reduction in the rents of those lands most unfavourable to cultivation, so as to enable them more successfully to compete with lands of a more fertile character. His Noble Friend (the Marquis of Chandos) had designated the report as a meagre and unsatisfactory document, and the Noble Lord opposite had also expressed his dissatisfaction. Now his recollection of the Noble Lord's opinion, as gathered upon the Com mittee, was not the same, he thought, as that he had now delivered. With respect to that Committee, he must say that it had exhibited industry, ability, and perfect impar tiality, in the performance of duties not in themselves agree able. But, if he recollected right—as the secrets of that prison -house had been divulged—(A laugh)--the Noble Lord had concurred in the propriety of the course pursued. The Noble Lord, who had commenced reading the report like a magician, backwards—(Laughter)--gradually pro gressing from important to slighter matter, had, to use the old style of phraseology, knocked out all the brains of the report.—( Laughter.) One by one he had stated his satis faction in most of the details, but in the report he could not agree in one. He was not sure that he did not express his satisfaction on the settlement of the question of the cur rency on moving for the Committee for Agricultural In quiry, according to that most agreeable reminiscence —(A laugh)—the recommendation contained in the King's speech. On that subject—a portion of the agricultUral question—he would read the resolution to which that House had thought it necessary to come. [The Right Hon. Baronet here read the resolution, which was to the effect that any alteration in the monetary system would be highly inexpedient and dangerous.] In what had followed from that alteration he had not been at all disappointed, as he had ventured from the first to predict them. With re seet to this, the Report, instead of stating the opinion of the Committee as a select body, had adopted the resolu tion of the House of Commons, in which every man con curred who had any interest in the country not solely de pending upon agriculture. They relied merely on the in trinsic force of truth. With respect to the Corn Laws, the Noble Lord thought it too important a subject to be treated by a Committee. The same with the malt tax, and the same with its concurrent subject, foreign grain. The Noble Lord thought the malt tax too important, as a Report of the Committee in favour of its reduction would be pledging the Chancellor of the Exchequer for future years. [Some expression of dissent from, we believe, Lord John Russell, was here made, on which Sir Robert Peel said, " Shall I nail you down to the words ?" a remark which, in consequence of its tone and manner, with its evident allu sion to what had taken place in Committee, created consi- - derable laughter.] The Noble Lord, he must say, had so industriously used his sickle in gathering up the different matters of which the evidence was composed, that he really had nothing whatever to do but to express his assent to him, that in making no report at all they would cause less disappointment than by making one. The country had all this time been gasping for an opinion ; and he agreed with the Noble Lord that it was better to present no report at all than present a mutilated document. It was true that the Noble Lord had been desirous of not passing over the remission of the county rate, which had been diminished by 70,0001. On this remission, so far diminished in conse- quence of some share of the expenses of criminal prosecu tions being borne by the Government, the Noble Lord was desirous of pronouncing a panegyric. To this he objected, for the agriculturists must necessarily be aware of the fact of so important a reduction in the county rate as a farthing in the pound, or else they did not pay sufficient attention to the subject of those burthens for the abatement of which they expressed such avidity; and, if supposed they were aware of it, it was necessary to mention it. Again, the Noble Lord suggested that the relief to the landowner by the passing of the Tithe Bill should be mentioned ; but as that measure still remained to be approved by the House of Lords, he thought it would be better to spare any men tion of it until it had passed into a law. The Noble Lord had also proposed that allusion should by made to the sub ject of the new poor laws, they having conferred such great benefit. Now, as be had taken a part in the passing of that measure, and did expect from it most important results, he should gladly have done so, but the benefits that bad arisen were not in evidence before them. He thought it was the most important measure ever given to the agriculturists, but as there was no evidence before them of this as a fact, as the subject had only been brought up in the course of in quiry, arising incidentally, and being no part of the main question, he thought that to give it so particular a promi nence would be doing more than they had a right to do. They might have predicted that the operation of that mea sure held out a degree of hope to the agricultural interest beyond any other ; but, though they might say so, they were not supported by evidence. The fact was, that it was to themselves the farmers must principally look. Let them turn their attention to the important improve ments which had been made in Scotland, where, by the use of an improved plough upon stiff lands, and a system of draining the sub-soil, very much benefit had arisen. Well, then, the Noble Lord had agreed to strike out everything about the currency, everything about the malt tax, and the collateral question of duty on foreign grain. The plough stood in too cold a clay—( Hear, hear)--it held too promi nent a position for the owners of light land ; and so, on the whole, it was thought better to omit any mention of the plough. For himself, he must say, that at first he was in clined to make a report ; but he afterwards, on the whole, acquiesced in the propriety of omitting it, and he was now quite convinced that, although disappointment was felt at the omission, the disappointment was as nothing to what would have been felt if a report had been made. He hoped that he had not mis-stated anything which had occurred in , the Committee, but he had thought it right to state what - he had, as the Noble Lord, as author of that Committee, was responsible for it—responsible, as having advised the King to recommend its appointment. Mr. C. SANFORD thought that if the Committe had done their duty they would have moved an adjournment, and drawn up a set of resolutions. Sir R. PRICE concurred with the Right Hon. Baro net the Member for Tamworth in thinking the subject was not one entirely for the Legislature. Mr. HAWES expressed his surprise that the Right Hon. Baronet should have claimed credit for his assistance in passing the New Poor Law Act. Sir R. PEEL had been totally misunderstood if he was supposed to have claimed credit for what he had done. He did not wish on any account to detract from the credit due to ,his Majesty's Government. He took no active part in it, but he voted for it, when be might have raised a fac tivate opposition by making it a party question. 'Aiter-, some further remarks from Mr. HAWES and from Sir JAMES GRAHAM, in explanation, which we -- Sit riot Vero', the evidence of the Committee was ordered tole received:: Ir. S. LE FEVRE then brought up the evidence. HOUSES OF PARLIAMENT. On the Order of the Day being moved, Mr. HUME rose to bring forward his motion respecting the building of the two Houses of Parliament. He com plained that the plan adopted by the Committee was not in accordance with the instructions laid down for the inte rior accommodation of the House. He thought, also, that too short a time had been allowed—the time being only three or four months—for the artists to prepare their plans. He had been informed that some of the most eminent ar chitects in the country would have contended for the ho nour of building the new Houses had they not thought that in so short a period they could not do justice either to them selves or the country. The plan of Mr. Barry made a beautiful and captivating picture, but it was in numerous respects deficient. The Hon. Member went on to com plain that several rooms required by the original instruc tions were not provided for at all in Mr. Barry's plan, and that many others were of much smaller dimensions than were therein required. The very body of the House was required to be capable of accommodating 420 Mem bers, instead of which Mr. Barry had made it. only ca pable of accommodating 360 ; and in one instance there was a discrepancy of full 1,000 feet area between the in structions and Mr. Barry's plan, and yet the Commission ers had ventured to say that the plan in all main respects corresponded with the instructions. But this was not all ; the expense threatened to be tremendous, and infinitely beyond the estimates. He well knew by experience how much the estimates of architects usually fell short of the actual expense. He could not forget that the estimate for Buckingham Palace was only 300,000/., and yet the build ing, before it was completed, cost from 780,0001 to 800,000/. The first estimate given by Mr. Barry was 500,000/. How accurately this estimate was made, the House might judge when they called to mind that five weeks afterwards it was increased to 720,000/. Now he was prepared to say, and he spoke on competent authority, that the plan could not be executed under 1,300,000/., and if all the ornaments, those ornaments which had so lured the eyes of the Commissioners—were to be executed, the cost would be more likely 1,800,000/., and this he would undertake to prove before any Committee which the House might think proper to appoint. Now the Com mittee had recommended that the plan of Mr. Barry should be adopted, provided that the cost would not materially exceed the estimate of 720,000/. The dis crepancies in the estimates were in some respects mon strous. Mr. Barry had calculated 4s. per foot for all those beautiful ornaments of curious Gothic tracery with which his design abounded ; whereas the facing of Henry the Seventh's Chapel was worth not less than 1/. Is. per foot, and the mere stone for St. Stephen's Chapel four shillings per foot, without the workmanship. He had also to com plain that the plan was now nothing like that originally chosen, that it had been altogether altered, and was no more like it than a square was like a triangle, to prove which assertion the Hon. Member referrred to the plans. The towers proposed by that Gentlemen seemed monstrous. Why, the large tower would be as high as the top of the dome of St. Paul's, and the lower tower as high as the be ginning of that dome ; for what earthly purpose of beauty or of utility he could not conceive. Another alteration he much disapproved of. They were, it seemed, to have a river terrace, and an embankment was to be carried out for that purpose, and to what extent did the House imagine ? Why, it was actually to block up within twelve feet three of the arches of Westminster-bridge, thus taking posses of a very considerable portion of the bed of the river itself. On these grounds, he thought they should commence de novo. He should conclude, therefore, by moving an ad dress to his Majesty, praying that public competition for plans for the rebuilding of the Houses of Parliament should again take place, without limitation of style, and according to a scale of expense to be previously fixed by Parliament. Mr. EWART seconded the motion. Mr. H. TRACY defended himself from the charges made against him of personal communications and corre spondence with Mr. Barry whilst he was competing. He denied also the charge that the Commissioners had said that the consideration of expenses would be productive of no public advantage. The next allegation of the competitors was, that the Commissioners were decided by the beauty of the elevation rather than by the fitness of the design. That he denied altogether. The prize was given to Mr. Barry solely for the general design, and not for the elevation in particular. The competitors further stated, that the de signs of Mr. Barry were in direct contradiction of the re solution of the Committee in 1833. It was true they were not in exact accordance with them ; but what was Mr. Barry bound to know of that Committee? His designs were in accordance with the resolution of the Committee of 1835, beyond which he could not have been expected to go. It was stated moreover by them that the superfi cial area of Mr. Barry's plan comprehended less space than that of the old Houses of Parliament ; in place of which, there was a difference of 5,243 feet in his favour in the Commons, and 6,054 in the Lords. The lobbies were longer, there were a greater number of rooms, and the ac commodation altogether was greatly increased. He was justified in saying that no objection to Mr. Barry's plan existed on the part of the Commisioners. The House of Commons and the House of Lords had sanctioned it, and he believed it had met with the approbation of the greater portion of the public.—(Hear.) Under these circum stances, he thought it would be unwise in the House to ac cede to the proposition of the Hon. Member for Middle sex, and a great injustice and injury to Mr. Barry.—( Hear.) Mr. ESTCOURT felt himself called on to declare that if the Hon. Member for Middlesex should persevere in his motion he would support him, that the country might have every opportunity which an extension of time could afford to enable it to attain a better plan. Sir J. C. HOBH OUSE said that so many complaints had been made against the chosen plan and the Commis sioners that it was a difficult task to recollect them all, and he would only attempt to reply to a few that seemed most deserving of attention. The last complaint made by the petitioners was, that the Commissioners had followed their own judgment in the selection of a design, and had not ap plied to more competent persons for information ; but such a course would have left them open to the charge of thereby avowing the fallacy of their own judgment, encou raging a rivalry of interested opinions, and showing well the incompetency of their own. He was, however, happy to say that the result had approved the wisdom of their choice. Their judgment in favour of Mr. Barry's plan had not only been unanimous among themselves, but it had sub sequently been approved by his Majesty, by the two Houses of Parliament, and he thought he might fairly say by the whole body of the disinterested and en lightened public.—(Hear, hear.) Another charge brought against the Commissioners was that of precipitancy in their proceedings. He thought that in a case of this delicate and important nature, it was necessary for the credit of the parties that every part of the transaction should be free from suspicion as well as injustice. He should, therefore, beg the attention of the House while lie proved to them that nothing had been done without due deliberation. The Hon. Gentleman then recapitulated the proceedings taken - _ - in the appointment of the first Committee on the 2d of March, 1835, and the subsequent Commission for the pa tient inspection and consideration of the designs. He argued that the best proof of the fairness of the formation of the first Committee, and their openness to the influence of public opinion, was, that they, after NI deliberation, bowed to that opinion, and, on the 3d of June, entirely re versed the course of proceeding they had at first determined on, thereby throwing the designs open to public conme tition, and the decision of competent Commissioners. He detailed the various steps taken—the address of the Com mittee to the Crown, June 15—the appointment of the Commission, July 14—to insure and impartial and judici ous selection of a plan—and stated that the Commissioners, when they had fixed on Mr. Barry's as superior in appear ance to all the others, ordered a rough estimate to be pre pared, which was the subject of several meetings and discus sions previous to its formal approbation by the Commissioners, and to the drawing up of the Report, which (we under stood the Honourable Member to say) was in a great degree drawn up by his Honourable Friend the Chancel lor of the Exchequer. As to the kind of objections they had to meet, and the critics they were required to please, he would beg leave to read a page of a criticism on their report. This singular article was a portion of a pamphlet or catalogue distributed at the door of the National Gal lery, where the desi g ns were exhibited. [The Honourable Member here read from page 19, amidst considerable laughter, several paragraphs, of which we could hear enough to understand that the labours and tastes of the Commissioners were therein placed in a very ludicrous point of view.] Such was the manner in which their gra tuitous cares were rewarded by those who, it appeared, were personally interested in decrying the result of their most mature and unbiassed deliberations. [The Right Honour able Gentleman then read various passages from the evi dence given before the Committee by the Commissioners, with respect to the reasons for their choice, and touching the improvements which the plan No. 64 (Mr. Barry's) ad mitted of, showing that the Commissioners had openly stated from the first that they did not intend to exclude the idea of improvement from the plan they might adopt— that, on the contrary, they stated they did not expect to obtain a perfect plan, and that they would cheerfully receive and apply any suggestions, from whatever quarter they came, which would enable them to erect a better building than they might accomplish unassisted. For his own part he saw no reason why they should not receive valuable practical assistance in every step of their progress, and he was sure the great object they had all so much at heart would be in a much fairer course of fulfilment than it could possibly be from an obstinate perseverance in an opposite exclusive line of proceeding. He knew, however, the difficulty-of pleasing everybody in a case of this nature, and he might, without fear of contradiction, at once assert that it was impossible.—( Hear, hear.) The most talented and perfect plan that could be devised by earthly architect would still be subject to such criticism and raillerLas they had just heard a specimen of. He believed that even if a plan of Archimedes or of Vitruvius had been selected, or. to come to the present day, suppose Mr. Wilkins's plan had been chosen—( Hear)—it would be impossible thereby to give general contentment.—(Laughter.) He had heard many speculations, and very various opinions, respecting the pre ference which ought to be given to Gothic or Grecian, civil or ecclesiastical, architecture for the Houses of Parliament but he and the Commissioners had the satisfaction to reflect that there was not a second opinion of the superior excel lence and beauty of the design above all others which they had selected for their approbation and reward.—(Hear.) Mr. HAWES said that the arguments of his Hon. Friend the Member for Middlesex had not been at all an swered. Certain rules had been laid down and certain offices and other apartments directed.to be included in the plans. To these rules the other architects had confined themselves, but Mr. Barry had disregarded them. He ad mitted that the facade of Mr. Barry's plan was very beau tiful ; but when the sections of the plan were applied to the, point of sight the repose and grandeur of the facade dis appeared. The first estimate sent in by Mr. Barry was 500,0001. ; but this he had since increased to 750,0001. Sir R. PEEL said that in reviewing the arguments of the Hon. Member for Middlesex, it should be borne in mind that that Hon. Gentleman meditated a change in the site upon which the Houses of Parliament were to be erected ; and, if this were the case, surely it could not be necessary to have a competition for new plans until the site was first fixed upon.—(Cheers.) Mr. HUME said that the change of the site was no pa rt of his motion. Sir R. PEEL knew that ; but had not the Hon. Mem ber proposed to alter the site ? And, having done so, why invite new competition until that point was disposed of? Another objection which struck him very forcibly against opening the subject was, that it would be extremely diffi cult to find Commissioners to act again. He knew that he for one had made up his mind never to be a Commissioner again—(A laugh)—because, if, after deciding on the mat ter submitted to them, and after inviting competition amongst professional architects, their whole proceedings must be set aside, and their decision quashed, and a new competition invited, he did not think that it would at all become any. man to act as a Commissioner a second time. The next thing that he would deprecate the most would be,. his being the successful competitor.—(A laugh.) In speaking of Mr. Barry and his plan he was perfectly un prejudiced, for he did not originally approve of the prin ciple of competition. He thought it proper that the Crown should select its own plan, and its own architect to carry it into execution. As to the style, he thought that was very properly selected to correspond with West , minster Abbey and Westminster Hall, and did credit to the taste of the Commissioners. The Hon. Member for Mid dlesex admitted that when he first came to consider thif subject, he was utterly ignorant upon it ; but that he bad since been able to embrace all its varieties and difficulties—tha t in short, he had become a Pericles or a Leo X.--(Loo,ghter.) With respect to the point of expense, that was no part of the subject before the House. The question now wa s whether or not the decision of the Committee should be acted upon or set aside—whether or not, in fact, Mr. Barrii plan should be adopted. If the present motion w ere adopted it would strike a blow at competition, and w ould postpone to an indefinite period the building of this great national work. He was sure that it would also be inju rious to professional architects themselves, and that they would rue the day they bad the misfortune to be invited to the competition.—(Cheers.) Mr. WYSE said that it would be most unjust to Mr. Barry to open the question again to competition, as it would afford all the architects in the country an opportunity 0 working up the materials of Mr. Barry's plan into new ( plans of their own. Mr. HUME said that, seeing the sense of the Hous e against him, he would withdraw his motion. The motion was then withdrawn. POST OFFICE BILL. On the motion that this Bill be now read a second time , Colonel SIBTHORP said that he had been for a locig time endeavouring to procure a most important return , which he thought ought to have been produced before alio Bill was read a second time. The return which he required would show how many days the different Commissioners had sat, and how many hours per diem. He wished to know if that return was likely to be laid on the table of the House, and when. Mr. F. BARING could assure the Hon. Member that no delay had been suffered to take place in preparing the return ; and the only reason why it had not a l rea dy bee° laid on the table was, that the Hon. Member had enmity' bered it with so many details, as to make it very difficult to be furnished. Mr. WALLACE then rose to speak to the question before the House, namely, the second reading of a Bill for, placing the Post-office under efficient controul. He wool ( ' begin by adverting to the first report of the Commissioner s of Inquiry, which recommended an important mercantil e regulation, namely, the transmission of prices current at a small rate of postage. This, he hoped, would be effected' the question, however, chiefly before the House was as to the adoption of a Board of Commissioners in preference to the administration of the Post-office under a Postmaster" General. It had been contended elsewhere that this 080 had been agreed to be adopted without due consideration' He considered it his duty to remind the House that Cool; missioners had sat on this question at different periods, an d all of them airiVed at the same conclusion. There wer e Commissions in 1787, 1797, 1809, 1829, and 1835, all Af which recommended that the office of Postmaster-Genera l should be placed under Commission. As the c onduc t of the Sub-Commissioners, Captain Evans and Mr. Gar' diner, had been animadverted upon elsewhere, he 1 11 ! 5 ' bound to say that he believed they had fulfilled their duty with great zeal and integrity. There were many points to which he wished to call the attention of t he Chancellor of the Exchequer. The first was the reduction of postage on letters. Lord Spencer and Lord Ashburton, had both expressed their opinion in favour of such a r e duction. And the latter Noble Lord had declared that A better application of 500,0001. of the revenue could not I '4 made than a reduction of postage to that amount. would greatly benefit the country without the revenue olt i ; mately sustaining any loss. The correspondence in t' t co untry would be so much promoted that an equal a nion° of revenue would be created. In the city of London . th e , utmost possible use had been derived f r om the establit ment of the two-penny and three-penny postage system. f was not, however, generally known that this description 0 r post, in point of fact, was available for the carriage of 1 3 °. 4 eels as well as letters. It would be of great benefit if th , l e system were established throughout the whole country , l a parcels being limited to a w eight of four ounces. He w° u , strongly press this point upon the attention of the GGover n , ment. There was a nother description of postage which r a ll quired consideration, that of ship letters. At present ae letters going by private ships were charged double po sti . l :o for being carried across the sea. He begged the attend